The FCC has dismissed the public's feedback[1]--they never considered it and did a poor job of soliciting it in the first place. The servers went down during the feed back process, the interface for solicitation was confusing and there wasn't much effort to prevent spam. There were 22 million replies (the previous record was 3.7 million during the last net neutrality debate). Even if you write most of that off as spam or duplicate, form-comments, that's still an immense amount of feedback. To dismiss it all is misrepresenting it.

[1] https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2017/11/why-the-fcc-igno...

You're complaining about servers going down while acknowledging that the number of comments was unprecedented?

And your link doesn't support your claim:

>The Pai staffer who spoke with reporters acknowledged that there were legitimate comments from both sides in the net neutrality docket. In Pai's draft order, the FCC comprehensively addresses all the serious comments that made factual and legal arguments, the official said.

> You're complaining about servers going down while acknowledging that the number of comments was unprecedented?

Yes I am. My point is that they did a poor job at soliciting feedback--not that they didn't get a lot. The fact the volume was so high just shows how important it was for this issue. If servers are going offline, then you can show good faith by extending the comment period or addressing it in some other manor.

Being "required to solicit comments and to consider them" doesn't mean you only consider a subset containing legal arguments.